you remind me of Republicans that supported Bush no matter what or Dems that support Obama no matter what with your obsessive defense of Mark Sanchez
I think the two go hand in hand. If you trade it should be to support a specific plan. Their plan was bogus. If they had stayed put and took Heath Miller, it would have been a better result than everything they came with after the trade.
I should remind you of a logical fan that doesn't need scapegoats and can see everything that is going on.
how? if they took Miller w/ original pick they don't get a vet TE, they have to pay Miller more money and they don't get Kerry Rhodes. How is that better?
oh, ok. that's different, obviously Heath became a decent player(I think he gets overrated a bit though) and that would change it but if that wasn't the way we were going we did get much more value trading down than we would have staying put. I have no issues bashing the picks themselves but the trade was a good one.
The whole draft would've been completely different if they had taken Heath instead of the trade so it's difficult to honestly say which would have turned out better. In my opinion Rhodes saved the deal from being a complete disaster. Still, I wish the Jets would've gone the opposite route that year.
That's all I'm saying. You're right, Blake not an all-pro but a pro-bowler which Nagle couldn't even have a wet dream about. Blake never had a winning season in Cincy, but he did put up decent QB numbers on a team that was almost as bad as the Jets. I don't think Blake would have gotten the Jets into the playoffs, but those two seasons of 3-13 and 1-15 might not have been that bad had he been the QB at the time.
I think letting Laverneous Coles get away was a huge HUGE mistake. You just had a young breakout QB and a young breakout WR in the same year who showed tremendous chemistry together. Makes sense to make sure they stay around together for a long while, right? Except that Bradway fails to sign Coles to any kind of extension and/or restructure, and the Skins get him. Doesn't matter that we got a 1st in return, we lost a young proven WR. Then to get him back we had to trade ANOTHER young WR (and former 1st round pick). What a clusterf*ck. Maybe having Coles on the 2004 team gives the Jets a better record. Maybe with him they win the game at Pitt.
we all loved Coles but he wanted too much money and we got a 1st rd pick for him leaving. Moss was ready to step in and we never missed a beat. I think trading Moss to get Coles back was the worse move.
I don't know. I liked Moss but Coles was the better overall receiver in my book. The Jets should have kept both.
Moss had the better career, both were very good. wish we could have kept both but for some reason we gave Chrebet a big deal entering 2002. Had we not done that we would have easily been able to keep Coles. I would have hated losing Wayne but Moss and Coles would have been a great duo.
You solely blame O'Brien for the Cleveland loss. You solely blame Brien for the Steelers Loss. You deny this?
Parcells was the reason the Jets last Coles and they probably would have drafted a better player at a different position than WR the year they drafted Moss but they were desperate for a WR Imo one of the worst moves ever made was the contract BP gave Vinny because it hurt the team for many years
of course I deny b/c I never said it. they played key roles in helping us lose but to say they were the sole reasons wouldn't be fair. I'm not so sure about that. I think Moss 2003 w/ Chad was better than Coles 2002.
